Can anyone tell me the latest on the future of this film? will there be anything else after the 25e extra minutes added? I heard that even with the 25 minutes included it was pulled pending further work?

Regards,

Hi Nawroz,

Personally I've not seen anything.

WB seem to make announcements only when there is something definite to report, I've not seen anything worthwhile on the Italian forums and the Leone family seem to be quiet at the moment. Gustavo van Peteghem from Andrea Leone Films used to answer emails but he may well not work for the Leones anymore. Some of the reports about further work may have been just speculation.

Vast sums of money were spent on the restoration but the results were disappointing and I wouldn't expect the Leone family to have much appetite for spending large sums of money on further work. People outside the immediate family need to have more influence and involvement but whether there is sufficient will or demand remains to be seen.

A post on another board mentions that in the teaser trailer on the extended blu-ray there's a shot of Tuesday Weld on the floor exposing her legs and some very nice black stockings, which doesn't appear in the movie.

I've never seen this before and thought it must be a joke but it is correct.

It just reminds me that we really need those missing 19 minutes, whatever state they're in.

I bought the single BD extended cut as the old cut on the second disc was identical to the previous BD.

What I'm now waiting to see is the remaining scenes that still haven't been included. A seamless branching BD would probably be best for that so you can choose how to watch without switching discs etc... unless the color/contrast changes really get to you.

I bought the single BD extended cut as the old cut on the second disc was identical to the previous BD.

What I'm now waiting to see is the remaining scenes that still haven't been included. A seamless branching BD would probably be best for that so you can choose how to watch without switching discs etc... unless the color/contrast changes really get to you.

Yeah, that is the ultimate dream, to have the extra 20 or so minutes added in, for a total running time of about 4 1/2 hours, which was Leone's ultimate preferred version. And with good image quality 😀

There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.

Yeah, that is the ultimate dream, to have the extra 20 or so minutes added in, for a total running time of about 4 1/2 hours, which was Leone's ultimate preferred version. And with good image quality 😀

That was his preferred cut for the projected TV version that never happened. There's no way he wanted a theatrical release that went that long.

That's what you get, Drink, for not appreciating the genius of When You Read This Letter.

I wasn't there. 1984 was the year I was born.But Frayling says that to get down to 3:47, Leone "very reluctantly" had to remove about 45 mins. of "significant" material. Leone's preferred version, if you believe Frayling, was around 4.5 hours.If you doubt that Leone wanted a theatrical film that long, remember that Leone initially wanted an even bigger, two-part film, but had to abandon those plans cuz the studio was afraid after the failure of "1900."

Maybe Frayling is wrong. Maybe. But I'd trust his info RE: OUATIA even more than on the other movies. By that time, Frayling had already met Leone; that chapter on OUATIA seems to have more info than that of the other movies.

Maybe you think the 3:47 version is the ideal version. But I don't see a reason to doubt that Leone preferred the extra 45 minutes. Among those scenes (some of which were added back recently by Scorsese and some not (yet) ) contain important info for the narrative. Particularly the scenes with Eve. In the 3:47 version she appears out of nowhere and they're ccomfortable enough to discuss business in front of her. Also the scene with elderly Carol is pretty confusing in the 3:47 version; the fuller version explains that.And how Noodles realizes his return is connected with Secretary Bailey's troubles - only in the longer version do we realize that it is because Noodles saw the limo that was tailing him at the cemetery blow up outside Bailey's estate.I can certainly see why Leone considered this "significant material."

« : November 29, 2015, 05:44:31 PM drinkanddestroy »

There are three types of people in the world, my friend: those who can add, and those who can't.

If you doubt that Leone wanted a theatrical film that long, remember that Leone initially wanted an even bigger, two-part film, but had to abandon those plans cuz the studio was afraid after the failure of "1900."

Yes - I'd always thought Bertolucci's 1900 was where Leone found the idea for having it in two parts.

I wasn't there. 1984 was the year I was born.But Frayling says that to get downn to 3:47, Leone "very reluctantly" had to remove about 45 mins. of "significant" material. Leone's preferred version, if you believe Frayling, was around 4.5 hours.If you doubt that Leone wanted a theatrical film that long, remember that Leone initially wanted an even bigger, two-part film, but had to abandon those plans cuz the studio was afraid after the failure of "1900."

Maybe Frayling is wrong. Maybe. But I'd trust his info RE: OUATIA even more than on the other movies. By that time, Frayling had already met Leone; that chapter on OUATIA seems to have more info than that of the other movies.

Maybe you think the 3:47 version is the ideal version. But I don't see a reason to doubt that Leone preferred the extra 45 minutes. Among those scenes (some of which were added back recently by Scorsese and some not (yet) ) contain important info for the narrative. Particularly the scenes with Eve. In the 3:47 version she appears out of nowhere and they're ccomfortable enough to discuss business in front of her. Also the scene with elderly Carol is pretty confusing in the 3:47 version; the fuller version explains that.And how Noodles realizes his return is connected with Secretary Bailey's troubles - only in longer version do we realize that it is because Noodles saw the limo that was tailing him at the cemetery blow up outside Bailey's estate.I can certainly see why Leone considered this "significant material."

Deep down, directors always prefer the longer versions. They worked so much on every line of dialogue, with the actors, the screenwriters, the cameramen... Cutting a shot is painful. Don't believe them. Listen to the editor. He's the guy who knows what story is supposed to be told. Because he wasn't on the set. Because it's his (only) job.

Everything that isn't linked to any on set problem (no time to do this so we did a cheaper version, actor who cannot tell his lines...) is "significant material". Hours have been spent for a line to be written this way. For the actor to tell it this way. For the frame, the lighting to hit this this way. "Significant material" is a meaningless term because everything that was done on set was "significant".

Possibly 2 versions of the movie can co-exist happily and hopefully the extended version can be further improved to be nearer to Leone's vision regarding colors, image quality and duration.

Sergio Leone and his son Andrea have both stated that Leone originally made a four and a half hour (270 mins) movie and 50 minutes were cut. In addition to significant material and explaining things more clearly, the cut scenes expanded on Noodles' relationship with women ("Déjà au découpage j'avais dû réduire beaucoup ce qui, dans le film, concerne les rapports avec les femmes."). Some viewers of the 229 min movie feel that Noodles is a sad individual but the book portrays him differently as a well-liked person admired by both men and women with lots of money and women and a liking for food and drink.

In 1984 Leone regretted making the cuts but by 1988 the 229 min version seemed to be his preferred cut. Possibly he was putting a brave face on it or perhaps the addition of an extra 9 minutes or so including "une scène d'amour avec Deborah petite fille" addressed some of his misgivings with the 220 min version.

Leone: "This one (229 min cut) is my version. The other explained things more clearly and it could have been done on TV in two or three parts. But the version I prefer is this one, that bit of reclusiveness is just what I like about it."

(Leone's interview with Oreste De Fornari in 1988)

Leone was a perhaps a bit naive or optimistic regarding a four and a half hour (270 mins) version.

Leone: It's a complicated story. They (the Ladd company) gave me carte blanche to do four and a half hours with the idea that it would be made in two parts, that is to say two films coming out together.

But four months after the start of editing ("quatre mois après le debut du montage"), they said to me no, it is not possible, because in the U.S., that's what they told me, I do not know if it is the truth, a sequel cannot come out less than three months after the first part, for competitive reasons, because operators are not necessarily the same for both parts.

If it were possible for both parts to be released simultaneously, it would result in unfair competition from operators who have a single theater. It therefore seems that some operators cannot handle a double distribution. They demanded that I cut the film.

I cut as much as I could and I arrived at the 3 hours 40 min (220 min) version which you have seen.

He also stated somewhere else that the 2 parts idea was abandoned when 1900 flopped. He said many things at different times, like you said yourself. In the end, I think the "truth" on the topic doesn't even exist since these decisions have been made while the movie was still in the cutting room. They were still creating it. The same cannot be said of the 2 hours version, which is ulterior.